Great Britain is not an Island

[Louis VI the Fat]

twisted knickers.

I was indeed inspired by the several of your posts. They didn't upset me in the slighest - I am not that prissy. If I get irritated, I'll make a cranky remark on the spot and don't open a thread about it.
No, I rather enjoy our clashes, and had hoped we could continue them here without derailing the Euro thread.

Here we go:

1. Britain is indeed an island

No it isn't. Britain is fully attached to Europe. Technically, the UK's borders are made up for the most part by wide rivers indeed, which would lead some to conclude it is an island. This, I am afraid, I must deem cartographicism.

Britain is socio-geographically not an island. Never has been. Corsica is, Iceland is. A thousand tribal and backward places in Europe are or have been. Britain, never. Not since the common Celtic culture, not in the Roman period, not in the age of invasions, not later either. Britain is not an insular country and has not followed a unique historical path. The UK is not a semi-European country. In the sense of Wallerstein or Braudel, the UK has always been part of the core of Europe. The idea of a continent plus a UK is therefore a myth. Contrary to public perception, the UK is amongst the most unlikely candidates to rightfully think of itself as 'different from Europe'.

2. Britain does not owe its wealth to the EU -

1 - Odd that your timeline should start post world war two.

2 - Further to this, the fact remains that a majority of the value of Britain's business dealings happen outside the EU.

1 - I could have started my timeline in 700 BC. And then wrote a hefty post about how Britain's wealth is based on the Italians. I deemed it unfair to point out that Britain has severly lagged behind Italy in GDP per capita for two thousand years. This is why I limited myself to the period of British EU membership. For this time period too, surprisingly, Italy has lead the UK in GDP per capita for longer than the reverse. Not until the early nineties did the UK overtook Italy.

2 - I am quite convinced a majority of British foreign trade is with the EU. Strangely, I can't find a link.

How successful has Britain been in the first duty of the nation state -

> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 1000 odd years?
Lots, including the UK
> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 500 odd years?
Lots, including the UK
> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 100 odd years?
Lots, excluding the UK.
> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 50 odd years?
None.
Which leaves the unfortunate period of 1900-1950 for a British exception. Or 5% of your timeline. Which I would not deem an historical exception.


How successful has Britain been in providing a stable and equitable polity -
> How many western european countries have suffered bloody revolution in the last 350 years?
Lots, including the UK
> How many western european countries have even existed in their current form for the last 175 years?
Lots - but this really depends a good deal on definition.
> How many western european countries suffered the perils of communism?
None
> How many western european countries suffered the perils of facism?
Lots, including Britain.
> How many of the above categories apply to Britain?
All?


How successful has Britain been in promoting sovereirn stability among its neighbours -
> How many western european countries successfully fought off Napoleon?
None.
The Russian winter and the onslaught of the Eastern Despots brought down Napoleon.
> How many western european countries successfully fought off ye olde' Kaiser?
Uhm, that depends who you mean. None in 1866-1870. Lots in 1914-1918.
> How many western european countries successfully fought off Hitler?
None.
The Russian winter and the onslaught of the Eastern Communists brought down Hitler.
> How many western european countries successfully kept communism contained?
All.
> How many nations did all of this and produced none of the mentioned despots?
I end up with 'none, none, none and all'. Which kind of renders it all moot.


The colonial questions are excellent, but really beyond the scope of this post.

4. The Commonwealth

I was thinking more about the old British 'Commonwealth first' idea. The, in my eyes, unrealistic belief that the Commonwealth is where Britain's future lies.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Britain is socio-geographically not an island.

Wikipedia classifies Great Britain as an island, geographically.

> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 1000 odd years?
Lots, including the UK
> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 500 odd years?
Lots, including the UK

How about successful invasion?

> How many western european countries suffered the perils of communism?
None
> How many western european countries suffered the perils of facism?
Lots, including Britain.

If you say that Britain has suffered the perils of fascism, you must also say that Germany, Spain, and perhaps France have suffered the perils of communism.

> How many western european countries successfully fought off Hitler?
None.

Well, the UK did a good job.

> How many western european countries successfully kept communism contained?
All.

By a complete technicality in how we define "Western" Europe, yes. If you count East Germany as part of the geographic Western Europe, then we cannot say that communism was successfully contained.

[Yoyoma1910]

Well, the UK did a good job.

By what, abandoning their allies in the begining, and then getting proped up by the Americans? The Germans had a saying, "The British will fight to the last Frenchman."

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

By what, abandoning their allies in the begining, and then getting proped up by the Americans? The Germans had a saying, "The British will fight to the last Frenchman."

Well, it did successfully fight off Nazi Germany. However it managed to do that, it still managed.

[Yoyoma1910]

Well, it did successfully fight off Nazi Germany. However it managed to do that, it still managed.

When did the allied forces become simply Britain? To say that is callous, and pays little respect to all those who were involved in the process. Do you really think they could have done it alone?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

When did the allied forces become simply Britain? To say that is callous, and pays little respect to all those who were involved in the process. Do you really think they could have done it alone?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain

The Brits did hold off the German forces.

[Hax]

I'm afraid you mixed up the meanings of Great Britain and the United Kingdom.

Great Britain is England, Wales and Scotland.

The United Kingdom consists of England, Wales, Scotland, the Island of Man, Northern Ireland and the rest of the overseas colonies.

[Yoyoma1910]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain

The Brits did hold off the German forces.

From your own source:

International participation

Both sides received outside support during the Battle of Britain.

[edit] Allied side

Main article: Non-British personnel in the RAF during the Battle of Britain

The Royal Air Force roll of honour for the Battle of Britain recognises 574 non-British pilots (out of almost 3,000 in total) as flying at least one authorised operational sortie with an eligible unit of the RAF or Fleet Air Arm between 10 July and 31 October 1940.[31]
126 German aircraft or "Adolfs" were claimed by pilots of 303 Squadron during the Battle.

This included 139 Poles, 98 New Zealanders, 86 Canadians, 84 Czechoslovakians, 29 Belgians, 21 Australians, 20 South Africans, 13 French, 10 Irish, and single figures from the United States of America, Jamaica, the British Mandate of Palestine, and Southern Rhodesia.

My point is, Britain does not stand alone. It has maintained its freedom because others have helped it do so. In conflict, it is therefore not an Island, working on its own, and would not have survived if it had been.

[Incongruous]

By what, abandoning their allies in the begining, and then getting proped up by the Americans? The Germans had a saying, "The British will fight to the last Frenchman."

The Germans also believed they could conquer and hold Europe, clearly anything the Nazi's had to say about the War was bollocks. Dreamers from the get-go.

Abandoning their allies? You mean the mighty French and their mighty army? Who were incapable of action throughout the whole thing? You mean, the same Brits who declared war on Germany for its' invasion of Poland?

[Yoyoma1910]

The Germans also believed they could conquer and hold Europe, clearly anything the Nazi's had to say about the War was bollocks. Dreamers from the get-go.

Abandoning their allies? You mean the mighty French and their mighty army? Who were incapable of action throughout the whole thing? You mean, the same Brits who declared war on Germany for its' invasion of Poland?

Your understanding of things is very thorough. Equaled only by your amount of laughter.

[Incongruous]

Your understanding of things is very thorough. Equaled only by your amount of laughter.

Tell me where I was wrong?

[Yoyoma1910]

Tell me where I was wrong?

You used laughing faces.



And also typed.



The French army, as well as the British initially failed together. Rather than, as previously agreed, offering addition help to the French, who had committed their troops to the Belgian front in an effort to stop the Germans, the British left the continent and their battered allies, which by the way were not just French. It allowed them to continue fighting, yes, but if you leave everyone else behind to face the slaughter, don't laugh at them afterward.




Would you like it if I covered Britain's own inability to effectively combat the Germans without the assistance of others?

[JR-]

1 -
No it isn't. Britain is fully attached to Europe. Technically, the UK's borders are made up for the most part by wide rivers indeed, which would lead some to conclude it is an island. This, I am afraid, I must deem cartographicism.
Britain is socio-geographically not an island. Never has been. Corsica is, Iceland is. A thousand tribal and backward places in Europe are or have been. Britain, never. Not since the common Celtic culture, not in the Roman period, not in the age of invasions, not later either. Britain is not an insular country and has not followed a unique historical path. The UK is not a semi-European country. In the sense of Wallerstein or Braudel, the UK has always been part of the core of Europe. The idea of a continent plus a UK is therefore a myth. Contrary to public perception, the UK is amongst the most unlikely candidates to rightfully think of itself as 'different from Europe'.

2 -
I could have started my timeline in 700 BC. And then wrote a hefty post about how Britain's wealth is based on the Italians. I deemed it unfair to point out that Britain has severly lagged behind Italy in GDP per capita for two thousand years. This is why I limited myself to the period of British EU membership. For this time period too, surprisingly, Italy has lead the UK in GDP per capita for longer than the reverse. Not until the early nineties did the UK overtook Italy.

I am quite convinced a majority of British foreign trade is with the EU. Strangely, I can't find a link

3 -
> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 1000 odd years?
Lots, including the UK
> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 500 odd years?
Lots, including the UK
> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 100 odd years?
Lots, excluding the UK.
> How many western european countries suffered invasion in the last 50 odd years?
None.
Which leaves the unfortunate period of 1900-1950 for a British exception. Or 5% of your timeline. Which I would not deem an historical exception.

How successful has Britain been in providing a stable and equitable polity -
> How many western european countries have suffered bloody revolution in the last 350 years?
Lots, including the UK
> How many western european countries have even existed in their current form for the last 175 years?
Lots - but this really depends a good deal on definition.
> How many western european countries suffered the perils of communism?
None
> How many western european countries suffered the perils of facism?
Lots, including Britain.
> How many of the above categories apply to Britain?
All?


How successful has Britain been in promoting sovereirn stability among its neighbours -
> How many western european countries successfully fought off Napoleon?
None.
The Russian winter and the onslaught of the Eastern Despots brought down Napoleon.
> How many western european countries successfully fought off ye olde' Kaiser?
Uhm, that depends who you mean. None in 1866-1870. Lots in 1914-1918.
> How many western european countries successfully fought off Hitler?
None.
The Russian winter and the onslaught of the Eastern Communists brought down Hitler.
> How many western european countries successfully kept communism contained?
All.
> How many nations did all of this and produced none of the mentioned despots?
I end up with 'none, none, none and all'. Which kind of renders it all moot.


The colonial questions are excellent, but really beyond the scope of this post.
I was thinking more about the old British 'Commonwealth first' idea. The, in my eyes, unrealistic belief that the Commonwealth is where Britain's future lies.

1 -
You haven't actually said anything to refute the point that from a politico-military viewpoint we are indeed an island which leaves us options unavailable to our continental friends, and also tempers our attitudes.

The point about whether we are ehtnically/culturally an island is irrelevant, and already answered, what is important is that we do not really see ourselves as EUropean, which is fine with us but seems to be a big problem with you. do you need the UK to lend credibility to the euro project?

2 -
To ignore the effect of the decline of empire and two world wars is to ignore three of the largest imaginable anomolies that could effect British wealth in the last 350 years.
So having thrown off our flirtation with sixties style socialism, and having broken the soviet backed unions that were playing havoc with our economic output, our growth has bloomed.......... so what?
I do not deny the benefit of the single market, i simply do not believe free trade is such an extraordinary gift from the EU that we should join up to every federalist love-in created over the water. Free trade should be the natural state of affairs, and is even enjoyed today by some non-EU members of the european fraternity.

I said the majority of the value of British trade, given that making stuff in factories or digging it out of the ground has become kind of passe in Britain in the last 30 years.

3 -
Gee you got me, it was only 950 odd years since 1066.
The Dutch Navy burning their way up the channel is hardly an invasion (full marks to the Dutch tho).
So the German Army took some colonial territory in the world wars, that is not Britain, and the channel islands 14 miles off the french coast can hardly be counted either.
Are you including the Falklands in the last fifty years as an invasion, an island that was seven thousand miles away with a population of bugger all. does that signify anything, regardless of whether it was an unsuccessful invasion?

Gee you got me, was i out by a few years when i said 350 odd years regarding revolutions?
Have we had our nice democracy interrupted by a period of communist rule? no.
Have we had our nice democracy interrupted by a period of facist rule? no.
None. Of. Them. Apply.

So we didn't defeat Napoleon's empire on French territory and exile him to some squalid island on the far side of the world..........?
Was Britain ever conquered territory? Did a free Britain act as a base from which conquered territories could be freed from the Kaisers grasp?
You mean we didn't fight off Hitler (and yes i know we weren't alone) and in fact blighty was conquered, and i have lived unknowing in what has been for the last 50 years Vichy Britain?
My point with communism was merely add it to the list of despots and ideologies that we have fought all of and produced none of.

Given that question 3 deals with the export and import of stability it seems very valid given that many european nations had worldwide colonies and thus have exported stability/instability in awesome measures in the previous centuries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My principle point, other than refuting yours, is that Britian is indeed different in part due to our geography, it has given us some unique advantages as well as some disadvantages, and has thus come to colour our culture, society and attitudes in a way that is markedly different.
Their is no utopia in the EU, which doesn't make it by any means a bad thing, but for Britain it simply isn't considered essential to be 'in' to the same degree as you continental types.
Our trade goes overseas always and to anywhere, not next door across the autobahn.
We do not worry about about invasion because no-one can transport enough divisions across fast enough.

We have different aims and goals in life formed in part from our geography and its concomitant effect on our history.

[HoreTore]

2 - I am quite convinced a majority of British foreign trade is with the EU. Strangely, I can't find a link.

The CIA has you covered, Louis! And since this isn't about any WMD's, I think we can trust them....

Export partners:
US 14.2%, Germany 11.1%, France 8.1%, Ireland 8%, Netherlands 6.8%, Belgium 5.3%, Spain 4.5%, Italy 4.1% (2007)

Import Partners:
Germany 14.2%, US 8.7%, China 7.3%, Netherlands 7.3%, France 6.9%, Belgium 4.7%, Norway 4.7%, Italy 4.2% (2007)

The economy of Britain is, indeed, on the continent. The only thing stopping that would be the coming Indian/Chinese powerhouse, and by then we'll all be in that situation. Together.

And we all know that the real reason Britain resists the euro is because of the national-romantic dream of the Pound and it's former glory. Brits do love to dream of the past, with their great empire, economy, army... They'll probably wake up eventually though. If not, their 3 remaining ships(boats) won't even be able to fend of the Norwegian navy

That's a good scenario, actually. But I doubt we'll pillage and rape this time... Judging by the standards of british women nowadays, I'd say we should stick with the pillaging.

[Jolt]

Judging by the standards of british women nowadays, I'd say we should stick with the pillaging.

[JR-]

And we all know that the real reason Britain resists the euro is because of the national-romantic dream of the Pound and it's former glory. Brits do love to dream of the past, with their great empire, economy, army... They'll probably wake up eventually though. If not, their 3 remaining ships(boats) won't even be able to fend of the Norwegian navy

That's a good scenario, actually. But I doubt we'll pillage and rape this time... Judging by the standards of british women nowadays, I'd say we should stick with the pillaging.

I won't argue about British women, there is a reason why i have a girlfriend from the continent, but jokes aside you are yet another person that has failed to provide any reason to explain WHY britain would be better off using the euro than sterling...............

And given that this thread is actually about the politics of Britains 'perverse' desire to remain apart from our EUro-integrationist cousins across the water............. you could probably do with weaving that into your argument, otherwise your comment is better left in the; Is it time for Britain to join the Euro thread.

[Sarmatian]

I won't argue about British women, there is a reason why i have a girlfriend from the continent, but jokes aside you are yet another person that has failed to provide any reason to explain WHY britain would be better off using the euro than sterling...............

Check the exchange rate when euro was first introduced and check it now. Since most of the British trading is with the countries on the continent, I'd think that's reason enough.

Just a few days ago I've read that Fabio Capello lost 1.2 million euros because of that...

[JR-]

Check the exchange rate when euro was first introduced and check it now. Since most of the British trading is with the countries on the continent, I'd think that's reason enough.

our exporters will benefit, our financial sector will suffer, but on balance...............

[Incongruous]

I think the animosity toward the UK as indicated by the French government's policy on farm subsidies is yet another reason why the UK will continue to view EUrope with dislike.

That and Brussels absurd policy on Turkey...

[Sarmatian]

our exporters will benefit, our financial sector will suffer, but on balance...............

Exporting benefit of inflation is overrated. Sure it's there, but quite limited, it's beneficial between let's say 1-3%, depending on the circumstances. Over that cons far outweigh the pros. But let's say it's beneficial, doesn't matter how high. It will make British goods cheaper on the continent, thus stimulation British exports but at the same time it will make continental goods more expensive in Britain, and you're importing more from Germany then you're exporting to Germany, same with France, Netherlands, Belgium etc...

I think in the long run it would be beneficial for UK to switch to euro. It's not like British economy is going to collapse if it doesn't but holding on to something because of conservatism or national pride when other option offer practical benefits isn't the best way to go.

[Incongruous]

Practicality, what a wonderful word, hardly one EUrope can be maiking however

[JR-]

Exporting benefit of inflation is overrated. Sure it's there, but quite limited, it's beneficial between let's say 1-3%, depending on the circumstances. Over that cons far outweigh the pros. But let's say it's beneficial, doesn't matter how high. It will make British goods cheaper on the continent, thus stimulation British exports but at the same time it will make continental goods more expensive in Britain, and you're importing more from Germany then you're exporting to Germany, same with France, Netherlands, Belgium etc...

I think in the long run it would be beneficial for UK to switch to euro. It's not like British economy is going to collapse if it doesn't but holding on to something because of conservatism or national pride when other option offer practical benefits isn't the best way to go.

against the damage euro harmonisation will cause to the competitive advantage of our financial sector?

the financial sector in the city of london brings in to the exchequer nearly one third of corporation tax tax from the whole of the UK.

you can just see how happy frankfurt and paris would be to see london adopt the same financial regulations as the rest of the continent.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Export partners:
US 14.2%, Germany 11.1%, France 8.1%, Ireland 8%, Netherlands 6.8%, Belgium 5.3%, Spain 4.5%, Italy 4.1% (2007)

Import Partners:
Germany 14.2%, US 8.7%, China 7.3%, Netherlands 7.3%, France 6.9%, Belgium 4.7%, Norway 4.7%, Italy 4.2% (2007)

Is there ANYBODY with whom we yanks do NOT have a trade defecit?

[Sarmatian]

Is there ANYBODY with whom we yanks do NOT have a trade defecit?

I'm pretty sure you don't have one with Serbia. Your surplus might go up to three or four thousand dollars

[Brenus]

“provide any reason to explain WHY britain would be better off using the euro”
1- To end the English banks robbery of Exchange rate, to be able to use the same money in Ireland, Germany, France
2 - to be able to compare de visu our salaries and charges with the rest of them.
3 - Spend your hard earned money without having to calculate how much it is in Pounds…
4 - Not having foreign useless coins in a jar on the top of the fridge waiting for the next time you will need them…
The last one is the most convincing....

[JR-]

“provide any reason to explain WHY britain would be better off using the euro”
1- To end the English banks robbery of Exchange rate, to be able to use the same money in Ireland, Germany, France
2 - to be able to compare de visu our salaries and charges with the rest of them.
3 - Spend your hard earned money without having to calculate how much it is in Pounds…
4 - Not having foreign useless coins in a jar on the top of the fridge waiting for the next time you will need them…
The last one is the most convincing....

all valid reasons for a non-Brit to want us in the euro...............................